A psychological exam ordered by Cox's new attorney, Peter Camiel of Seattle, after he was convicted showed Cox suffered from several paranoid disorders.
"I put a lot of people in fear by the things that I said," Cox told the court Tuesday. "Some of the crazy stuff that was coming out of my mouth, I see that, and I sounded horrible.
"I couldn't have sounded any worse if I tried," he said. "The more scared I got, the crazier the stuff. I wasn't thinking, I was panicking."

I think this guy has several alts here on Fark.

What, a common criminal with a big mouth bragging about committing federal felonies (that weren't true, btw)? Meh.

We aren't close to requiring a "Second Amendment Solution" yet. We're still on the first couple of boxes. As long as we have the first 3 in working order, we don't have to resort to the 4th.

dittybopper: (that weren't true, btw)?

Well, some may have been.

Still, I wonder how much of it was instigated by the government. It's pretty much well known that if you claim to be part of some militia organization, the FBI is going to actively attempt to infiltrate that group. They've been doing that since the 1990's.

Step 1: Perform military exercises out in the woods, preparing to take on a fully-trained, trillion-dollar-a-year fighting force with fully-trained, well-equpped soldiers that will not only has absolute air superiority with tactics synchronized through satellite and computer communication, but will eventually be able to employ robots which take human casualties out of the equation.  This way, if the government comes after your freedoms, you'll be ready to take them on.
Step 2: ROFL

Mike_LowELL: Step 1: Perform military exercises out in the woods, preparing to take on a fully-trained, trillion-dollar-a-year fighting force with fully-trained, well-equpped soldiers that will not only has absolute air superiority with tactics synchronized through satellite and computer communication, but will eventually be able to employ robots which take human casualties out of the equation.  This way, if the government comes after your freedoms, you'll be ready to take them on.
Step 2: ROFL

I've been trying to explain this to various retarded conservative friends over the past few months.  They seem to labor under the delusion the Army would never attack it's citizens and I have to explain again that "The Army" doesn't have to do shiat, just a couple of guys in a trailer with link to the Predators.

Farking 21st Century technology, how does it work?

Mike_LowELL: Step 1: Perform military exercises out in the woods, preparing to take on a fully-trained, trillion-dollar-a-year fighting force with fully-trained, well-equpped soldiers that will not only has absolute air superiority with tactics synchronized through satellite and computer communication, but will eventually be able to employ robots which take human casualties out of the equation.  This way, if the government comes after your freedoms, you'll be ready to take them on.
Step 2: ROFL

That's not the paradigm now. it's just that some people haven't gotten the message.

dittybopper: dittybopper: (that weren't true, btw)?

Well, some may have been.

Still, I wonder how much of it was instigated by the government. It's pretty much well known that if you claim to be part of some militia organization, the FBI is going to actively attempt to infiltrate that group. They've been doing that since the 1990's.

Good.  Investigating terrorists is what they do.  I don't know how they could "instigate" someone into organizing a terrorist organization.

dittybopper: Mike_LowELL: Step 1: Perform military exercises out in the woods, preparing to take on a fully-trained, trillion-dollar-a-year fighting force with fully-trained, well-equipped soldiers that will not only has absolute air superiority with tactics synchronized through satellite and computer communication, but will eventually be able to employ robots which take human casualties out of the equation.  This way, if the government comes after your freedoms, you'll be ready to take them on.
Step 2: ROFL

That's not the paradigm now. it's just that some people haven't gotten the message.

That's pretty much the typical terrorist fantasy. These guys only associate with others like them and don't realize how few people share their ideas.

Not to mention the fact that they don't even have the balls to resist arrest, which tells you that they would piss their pants and cry like little girls if they ever had to face combat troops.

Ennuipoet: I've been trying to explain this to various retarded conservative friends over the past few months.  They seem to labor under the delusion the Army would never attack it's citizens and I have to explain again that "The Army" doesn't have to do shiat, just a couple of guys in a trailer with link to the Predators.

Farking 21st Century technology, how does it work?

Apparently not really all that well, or we wouldn't still be in Afghanistan, and we didn't use them to win in Iraq: We co-opted the tribal leadership there (ie., it was old fashioned politicking, not high tech).

Or, to put it another way: Don't be too proud of this technological terror you've constructed. The ability to destroy things remotely is insignificant next to the power of ideology.

/I find your lack of faith disturbing.

Consider places like Afghanistan and Iraq, though: Mostly, they are desert-like areas, some flat, some mountainous, but generally with a very low amount of vegetation.

Now, this is not too far from where I live:



How easy do you think a drone is going to have finding a small group of people in that? What if they disperse? How are the drones going to distinguish the infrared signatures of human-sized animals from humans?* How are you going to distinguish them from normal hikers? What will happen the first time you wipe out a bunch of innocent people hiking with a bomb or missile from an MQ-9 Reaper because they were mistaken for legitimate targets? What if it was a group of Cub Scouts? What if so-called "militias" take to dressing like hikers, hiding their guns in their packs or other normal hiking equipment except for when they are being actively used? How will you know who the target is?

No, I don't think the use of drones would be a game changer in the way you think it would be. In my opinion, that would actually work against the government. You start dropping bombs or missiles in the United States, even on what are legitimate targets, and you are going to eventually make a mistake, and in a country with strong free speech protections, that mistake will be exceedingly costly. And it wouldn't necessarily be all that hard to encourage such mistakes by the use of conventional ruses.

Think hard about it: How many times have you heard about a drone being used against a wedding or other family gathering in Afghanistan? People in the US generally don't care that much because no one knows them, and the media can't get there to report on it. But imagine a drone strike on some teenagers partying in the woods, or a family camping, or some hikers. Imagine yourself looking at the images of a bombed out camper and the body of a kid lying there, covered in a sheet. Maybe his parents *WERE* planning something or actively fighting, but that kind of visceral image doesn't go over well in the United States.

So yeah, I can't imagine drone strikes in the US. It would be exceedingly counterproductive for any government to try it, it would confirm the paranoid suspicions of people like Alex Jones, giving them a mainstream audience and the ability to say "I *TOLD* you so!", and it would be tantamount to an admission that they already lost.

*In search mode, you can't focus in too closely. It's like looking through a soda straw if you use too much magnification, and at lower levels from a distance, the resolution is such that a deer, bear, or moose is going to be indistinguishable from a person. Is that group of blobs a squad of rebels, or some does bedded down?

Ennuipoet: Mike_LowELL: Step 1: Perform military exercises out in the woods, preparing to take on a fully-trained, trillion-dollar-a-year fighting force with fully-trained, well-equpped soldiers that will not only has absolute air superiority with tactics synchronized through satellite and computer communication, but will eventually be able to employ robots which take human casualties out of the equation.  This way, if the government comes after your freedoms, you'll be ready to take them on.
Step 2: ROFL

I've been trying to explain this to various retarded conservative friends over the past few months.  They seem to labor under the delusion the Army would never attack it's citizens and I have to explain again that "The Army" doesn't have to do shiat, just a couple of guys in a trailer with link to the Predators.

Farking 21st Century technology, how does it work?

Magnets.

dittybopper: Ennuipoet: I've been trying to explain this to various retarded conservative friends over the past few months.  They seem to labor under the delusion the Army would never attack it's citizens and I have to explain again that "The Army" doesn't have to do shiat, just a couple of guys in a trailer with link to the Predators.

Farking 21st Century technology, how does it work?

Apparently not really all that well, or we wouldn't still be in Afghanistan, and we didn't use them to win in Iraq: We co-opted the tribal leadership there (ie., it was old fashioned politicking, not high tech).

Or, to put it another way: Don't be too proud of this technological terror you've constructed. The ability to destroy things remotely is insignificant next to the power of ideology.

/I find your lack of faith disturbing.

Consider places like Afghanistan and Iraq, though: Mostly, they are desert-like areas, some flat, some mountainous, but generally with a very low amount of vegetation.

Now, this is not too far from where I live:

[1.bp.blogspot.com image 640x480]

How easy do you think a drone is going to have finding a small group of people in that? What if they disperse? How are the drones going to distinguish the infrared signatures of human-sized animals from humans?* How are you going to distinguish them from normal hikers? What will happen the first time you wipe out a bunch of innocent people hiking with a bomb or missile from an MQ-9 Reaper because they were mistaken for legitimate targets? What if it was a group of Cub Scouts? What if so-called "militias" take to dressing like hikers, hiding their guns in their packs or other normal hiking equipment except for when they are being actively used? How will you know who the target is?

No, I don't think the use of drones would be a game changer in the way you think it would be. In my opinion, that would actually work against the government. You start dropping bombs or missiles in the United States, even on what are ...

I'd say that we've shown that we have no problem blowing up anything we think might be something we would want to blow up. That would include human-sized animals and random hikers. Most drones, however, are used to recon movements. We send in patrols to clean up those areas.

I think the whole dream some people have of fighting the government is pretty absurd.  For the most part, the population of this nation isn't anywhere near fired up or even capable of being fired up enough. The numbers of "resistance" types would be small and they would be characterized as terrorists. We have no problems sending in troops to shoot local terrorists. As long as elections still happen, TVs still work and internet porn is available, there will not be any revolution. Nobody will rise up, save small cells of crazy people (like today) and they will be squished out of existence rapidly.

Meh, if there was a major uprising, all the government would have to do is turn off the electricity, water, communications and have grocery suppliers stop all food deliveries.

Or, if they just wanted to be dicks, they'd roll the armor out. I'd imagine the first Rambo-wannabe that found out his high-powered .22 AR-15 didn't worked very well against an IFV would crap his intestines out.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Of course, there's also a good chance that the military could run into the same problems the Soviets did in Afghanistan with the Mujahideen. Guerrilla warfare would be the norm as most people would figure out real quick that you don't want to go toe to toe with the US military.

dittybopper, agreed that drone strike are pretty much useless against anything other than fixed targets or a decent sized group/convoy.
However, if a group is large enough and organized enough to be a threat to more that local law enforcement, then it will be able to be targeted by drone strikes.

While a group of 20-30 folks living in the woods would not be subject to drone strikes, it probably not be that difficult for the Army to rustle up a couple divisions and send then on a search and locate sweep with a pretty good chance of finding them.

dr_blasto: I think the whole dream some people have of fighting the government is pretty absurd. For the most part, the population of this nation isn't anywhere near fired up or even capable of being fired up enough. The numbers of "resistance" types would be small and they would be characterized as terrorists. We have no problems sending in troops to shoot local terrorists. As long as elections still happen, TVs still work and internet porn is available, there will not be any revolution. Nobody will rise up, save small cells of crazy people (like today) and they will be squished out of existence rapidly.

This.  Good grief this.  Frankly, the general population would care less about these small cells and when they have popped up no one cared when the government wiped them out.  The Derp Corp seems to forget they are a tiny minority and what they preach is actually against the law.  A few days of news coverage and then back to Honey Boo Boo.

dittybopper: How easy do you think a drone is going to have finding a small group of people in that? What if they disperse? How are the drones going to distinguish the infrared signatures of human-sized animals from humans?* How are you going to distinguish them from normal hikers? What will happen the first time you wipe out a bunch of innocent people hiking with a bomb or missile from an MQ-9 Reaper because they were mistaken for legitimate targets? What if it was a group of Cub Scouts? What if so-called "militias" take to dressing like hikers, hiding their guns in their packs or other normal hiking equipment except for when they are being actively used? How will you know who the target is?

Imagine the government turning off communications and suspending the Constitution. They could kill children by the hundreds and who's gonna know about it? Say the wrong thing and you can disappear. You also couldn't communicate or coordinate with your fellow rebels because they'd be jamming all electronics.

And if you think you're gonna run and hide in the woods...brilliant idea! Because millions of other people don't have that same idea. Once everyone in the major cities have all their food run out and their water shut off, they'll probably be fleeing for the same areas you are after their cities are burned to the ground. Yep, the woods are a really good place to hide. Good thing the military hasn't ever heard of defoliants, either.

vpb: dittybopper: dittybopper: (that weren't true, btw)?

Well, some may have been.

Still, I wonder how much of it was instigated by the government. It's pretty much well known that if you claim to be part of some militia organization, the FBI is going to actively attempt to infiltrate that group. They've been doing that since the 1990's.

Good.  Investigating terrorists is what they do.  I don't know how they could "instigate" someone into organizing a terrorist organization.

They can instigate people into taking actions that are illegal, providing all the support and material means necessary, and cultivating them to do so without stepping over the technical legal definition of entrapment. Without the money, support, and most importantly the cultivation, nothing would have happened.

It's like making friends with the withdrawn kid at school, encouraging him to stand up to imaginary bullies, pumping up his self-worth and saying he has to fight back to teach them a lesson, then when he finally asks if you can get him a gun, you give him a starter pistol so no one gets hurt.

You haven't stopped anything that you haven't created yourself.

I don't have a problem with the FBI/ATF/DEA/whoever monitoring people like that, but when they are pretty much the sole monetary, material, and ideological support for the alleged "terrorists", like they have been in the past, I'm really not impressed that they made us any safer. They just sucked in some poor sap with a big mouth, who more than likely would have just left it at that if the government didn't actively intercede.

I think the reason why they do that is that they don't have infinite resources. They can't just sit there and watch malcontents who just mouth off occasionally about how they hate gun control or the Great Satan America indefinitely. There is an institutional pressure to make a case so that they can make an arrest, which they can then use to justify their jobs and budget expenditures to Congress.

vpb: I don't know how they could "instigate" someone into organizing a terrorist organization.

FBI agents are really easy to spot.

Organize a group like anarchists. Have a big roundtable once you get a lot of membership. The bigger guy who says "Let's blow up (whatever)! I can get a bomb!" is the Fed. Pretty easy.

Good luck with the fantasy.

It is interesting to think of a bunch of folks, who have paid taxes, who have records, who people know in their own counties, might magically escape notice. Notice enough to set themselves up as a revolution against one of the strongest militaries in the world--especially given that the fastest growing groups on terrorist watch lists have been paramilitary "militias" and this was under GW's watch.

You want to see how "ineffective" your government is? Try lobbing a bunch of grenades at it and calling for others to do the same. All of your goodies cost money, need to be maintained, and yes, Virginia, your local law enforcement probably knows where you yahoos go to pop off rounds and play soldier, and you hurt folks, all amusement will disappear...

dittybopper: Ennuipoet: I've been trying to explain this to various retarded conservative friends over the past few months.  They seem to labor under the delusion the Army would never attack it's citizens and I have to explain again that "The Army" doesn't have to do shiat, just a couple of guys in a trailer with link to the Predators.

Actually it works pretty well.  There is a reason you don't hear about the Taliban winning any battles.  The only reason we are still there is because there is no stable government there to had things over to.

But that's beside the point.  Successful rebellions like in Libya have popular support.

You don't.

There aren't enough of you to even involve the military, law enforcement will take care of you nuts.  You don't have the organization, the discipline, the equipment, the training or the dedication that the Taliban have.  Comparing "militias" to the Taliban is like comparing the Boy Scouts to the Army.

There have been individual survivalists who have fought it out with the police, but I can't think of a single militia group that has even had the balls to put up a fight when the police took them down.  Basically angry white men acting out violent fantasies.

Ennuipoet: dr_blasto: I think the whole dream some people have of fighting the government is pretty absurd. For the most part, the population of this nation isn't anywhere near fired up or even capable of being fired up enough. The numbers of "resistance" types would be small and they would be characterized as terrorists. We have no problems sending in troops to shoot local terrorists. As long as elections still happen, TVs still work and internet porn is available, there will not be any revolution. Nobody will rise up, save small cells of crazy people (like today) and they will be squished out of existence rapidly.

This.  Good grief this.  Frankly, the general population would care less about these small cells and when they have popped up no one cared when the government wiped them out.  The Derp Corp seems to forget they are a tiny minority and what they preach is actually against the law.  A few days of news coverage and then back to Honey Boo Boo.

Or they snap when they realize how insignificant and impotent they are and shoot up a school.

doglover: vpb: I don't know how they could "instigate" someone into organizing a terrorist organization.

FBI agents are really easy to spot.

Organize a group like anarchists. Have a big roundtable once you get a lot of membership. The bigger guy who says "Let's blow up (whatever)! I can get a bomb!" is the Fed. Pretty easy.

You sound experianced with these things.

PacManDreaming: dittybopper: How easy do you think a drone is going to have finding a small group of people in that? What if they disperse? How are the drones going to distinguish the infrared signatures of human-sized animals from humans?* How are you going to distinguish them from normal hikers? What will happen the first time you wipe out a bunch of innocent people hiking with a bomb or missile from an MQ-9 Reaper because they were mistaken for legitimate targets? What if it was a group of Cub Scouts? What if so-called "militias" take to dressing like hikers, hiding their guns in their packs or other normal hiking equipment except for when they are being actively used? How will you know who the target is?

Imagine the government turning off communications and suspending the Constitution. They could kill children by the hundreds and who's gonna know about it? Say the wrong thing and you can disappear. You also couldn't communicate or coordinate with your fellow rebels because they'd be jamming all electronics.

Google my user name. I know more about the subject of electronic warfare than you do. You can't shut down all communications. The US government doesn't have the resources (though they wish they did!).

Even if they tried, you can't jam local communications because it would require wideband jamming over a huge swath of frequencies

Also, they wouldn't jam them for practical reasons: It's better to listen. You can't simultaneously jam and DF. Communications that don't happen can't be analyzed for connections, etc.

Besides which, legally the government can't prevent the news media from reporting on such things. Any government that tried would be in violation of the Constitution, and thus illegitimate.

And if you think you're gonna run and hide in the woods...brilliant idea! Because millions of other people don't have that same idea. Once everyone in the major cities have all their food run out and their water shut off, they'll probably be fleeing for the same areas you are after their cities are burned to the ground. Yep, the woods are a really good place to hide. Good thing the military hasn't ever heard of defoliants, either.

1. I'm not talking about a mass exodus from the cities in some sort of post-apocalyptic scenario. I'm talking about small groups of people. The sort of groups that can form, perform some action, and in the face of pressure, simply evaporate.

2. The profligate use of defoliants did not help us in Vietnam: Even in the Winter, when nature defoliates itself, you still have the problem of the tree trunks themselves, not to mention terrain features, and a snow cave would be very good at diffusing your infrared signature. Properly sited, it might even be largely invisible.

vpb: Successful rebellions like in Libya have popular support.

You don't.

I'm not rebelling, nor would I in all but the most dire "loading people into cattle cars to camps" scenario: I've got a job, a family, and a house. Too much to lose.

No, you don't have to worry about me. This is just an intellectual exercise for me, kind of like the thread where I was talking about how Argentina could invade the Falklands: I'm not Argentinian, nor am I British, or even in the military anymore, just an interested observer.

The people you have to worry about are the ones who like shooting, have combat military experience, and are mostly unattached and/or don't have deep roots in any particular community, and who hold extreme ideological views*. Those are the ones you have to watch out for, from a practical standpoint, because those are the ones with a track record of actually *DOING* things.

Problem is, they tend to do stuff on their own, or with at most the help of one or two others, so finding them and stopping them before they do something is a real practical problem.

*Some might claim that I hold such views, I suppose, depending on their viewpoint, but really I don't consider them such: Many of the laws regarding firearms are quite legitimate, and I don't have a problem with, for instance, requiring a license to carry concealed in public or for hunting purposes. What I have a problem with are laws that make it as difficult and expensive as possible just to own, say, a handgun, in order to discourage their ownership, or in the banning of modern rifles or modern ammunition or ammunition feeding devices.

vpb: doglover: vpb: I don't know how they could "instigate" someone into organizing a terrorist organization.

FBI agents are really easy to spot.

Organize a group like anarchists. Have a big roundtable once you get a lot of membership. The bigger guy who says "Let's blow up (whatever)! I can get a bomb!" is the Fed. Pretty easy.

You sound experianced with these things.

Don't you read the news?

Named in TFA:

Schaeffer Cox
Lonnie Vernon
Coleman Barney

Why do so many militia members, no matter what part of the country they're from, have weird, bygone names like this?

Every time I read an article about some militia that's been infiltrated, the names of their members sound like something out of Southern Gothic literature. Somebody really needs to make an American Militia Member Name Generator.

vpb: Or they snap when they realize how insignificant and impotent they are and shoot up a school.

Except they don't.

vpb: doglover: vpb: I don't know how they could "instigate" someone into organizing a terrorist organization.

FBI agents are really easy to spot.

Organize a group like anarchists. Have a big roundtable once you get a lot of membership. The bigger guy who says "Let's blow up (whatever)! I can get a bomb!" is the Fed. Pretty easy.

You sound experianced with these things.

I grew up in Pittsburgh. My father "worked" in the steel mills part time in high school, but that time was a huge labor dispute that eventually killed the industry. The agent provocateurs were not so easy to spot in a steel mill because all the men were athletic of frame, but they were always the ones who insisted on illegal activity first. If someone went from "Let's make a picket line." to "Let's beat the fark outta them scabs." you knew it a fed.

Same with moonshinin', another Appalachian tradition right next to unionizing and banjo music.

You can always spot the feds because they don't ask about shine, they ask about "white liquor" the poor bastards.

vpb: Actually it works pretty well.  There is a reason you don't hear about the Taliban winning any battles.  The only reason we are still there is because there is no stable government there to had things over to.

It works well? So what would happen to me, as a westerner, if I were to wander too far out of the Green Zone in Kabul? Would the US assign a drone to watch over me? And how would that drone protect me, by dropping a bomb on the people who killed or kidnapped me when it's too late?

No.

I'm going to make a prediction: If we ever leave Afghanistan, within 5 years, or 10 at the most, any government that we set up will have fallen. The Taliban have relatively widespread support in large swaths of the country, and it's harder for us to co-opt the tribal leadership in Afghanistan than it was in Iraq because the tribal leadership in Iraq were honest crooks: They stayed bought.

vpb: I can't think of a single militia group that has even had the balls to put up a fight when the police took them down.

Maybe it's because the police don't try to go in guns blazing anymore.

FBI Critical Incident Response Group

Do you remember Ruby Ridge, or were you not born yet? Then almost at the same time Waco. The government farkED UP. THEY killed people, not the militia. Not the cult. The government did the dirty deeds. Thus it was that we the people realized there was some seriously farked up shiat going on and all the agencies had to do some housecleaning and re-organize their methods. Since then, we really haven't had any armed confrontations with militia groups that ended poorly because NEITHER SIDE wants that.

What violence in your soul are you projecting?

If you have to limit your movements, hide in snow caves, and stay away from others lest you look like a target, forest or not, you're fighting on someone else's terms. Unless you have popular support, you won't last long.

dittybopper: vpb: doglover: vpb: I don't know how they could "instigate" someone into organizing a terrorist organization.

FBI agents are really easy to spot.

Organize a group like anarchists. Have a big roundtable once you get a lot of membership. The bigger guy who says "Let's blow up (whatever)! I can get a bomb!" is the Fed. Pretty easy.

You sound experianced with these things.

Don't you read the news?

Yes, but I can tell the difference between a fact and a claim made by a guy trying to save his ass.

Not being able to say "no" when you are offered the opportunity to commit a crime doesn't mean you were entraped.

When he came out in 2007 he tried to go straight, but money was tight

That doesn't sound too much like a innocent law abiding guy who was manipulated into a crime by the FBI, it sounds like he went out looking for a way to make money illegally, was offered a deal and took it.

That is one weird-looking dude. Can't put my finger on why I'm thinking that. And it has nothing to do with the orange jumpsuit clashing with his complexion...

dittybopper: Or, to put it another way: Don't be too proud of this technological terror you've constructed. The ability to destroy things remotely is insignificant next to the power of ideology.

Nice.

*internet high-five*

xanadian: That is one weird-looking dude. Can't put my finger on why I'm thinking that. And it has nothing to do with the orange jumpsuit clashing with his complexion...

High cheekbones, girl's haircut.

dittybopper: vpb: Actually it works pretty well.  There is a reason you don't hear about the Taliban winning any battles.  The only reason we are still there is because there is no stable government there to had things over to.

It works well? So what would happen to me, as a westerner, if I were to wander too far out of the Green Zone in Kabul? Would the US assign a drone to watch over me? And how would that drone protect me, by dropping a bomb on the people who killed or kidnapped me when it's too late?

No.

I'm going to make a prediction: If we ever leave Afghanistan, within 5 years, or 10 at the most, any government that we set up will have fallen. The Taliban have relatively widespread support in large swaths of the country, and it's harder for us to co-opt the tribal leadership in Afghanistan than it was in Iraq because the tribal leadership in Iraq were honest crooks: They stayed bought.

I suppose they could, but that isn't the point.  We have no trouble beating the taliban on the battle field, and they force us out that's what military power is.  The fact that Afghanistan has internal divisions and social problems has nothing to do with military technology, neither does the fact that we don't have the will to stay forever.

If there isn't enough popular support for large parts of the military to back the rebels, there wouldn't be enough for them to even hide out.  You can't blend in with the civilian population if they dial 911 to report you.

If there is, then militia wackos aren't going to matter.